To the editor:

In his letter “Israel opening?” (Public Forum, March 8), Don Conrad states that he is not a political scientist, but he offers his interpretation of Israel’s actions and future. Especially ludicrous is his idea that “Israel could insist that the Palestinian Authority in the West Bank and Hamas in Gaza represent one side of the table.” I wonder if Mr. Conrad’s source of knowledge is current. Hamas and Hezbollah communicate with weapons and terror, not words and acts of diplomacy. And Gaza? Even Egypt doesn’t want Gaza.

He goes on to suggest that Israel could “sweeten the invitation” by limiting settlements on the West Bank. Isn’t Israel doing that now?

What did he mean when he wrote that Israel should respect the “concept of an East Jerusalem”? Does he mean Israel should give up the “Old City”? To add insult to injury, he thinks Israel should reconsider “the nature and message of the Wall.” Is he referring to the Wailing Wall? Is he suggesting that Israel give up one of the few holy places left in Jerusalem? What about Christians reconsidering the “nature and message” or Bethlehem” Or the Muslims reconsidering the “nature and message” of the Dome of the Rock, which covers another sacred place to Jews, the mountain where Abraham went to follow The Holy One’s commandments to offer his son as a sacrifice?

I would like to ask Mr. Conrad when he last visited Israel, how long he was there and how many people he communicated with, both Jewish and Muslim.

Or maybe he should read the Bible: “If I forget thee, O Jerusalem…”